@rapt The article also compares it to the soft power of a Football/Soccer team fans over the team's management. If BitCoin were to be algorithmatically full of holes obvious for one such as you to see, then isn't it also algorithmically full of holes for many people to exploit? You're the one making the claim that, all experience to the contrary, BitCoin is insecure. You're making the extraordinary claim, not me. The burden of proof is on you, not me.

Have you read the specification document for BitCoin? I have. bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I've recently also given an argument as an answer that assuming people can decide to ignore the new rules (much like people can decide to ignore the old rules), then a malicious rule change on the part of malicious users still won't compromise the current BitCoin.

@chytrik Your usual BS & poor reading comprehension. I'll pass on this one.

@rapt your hubris is astounding, I’m coming to think you’re just intentionally trolling at this point. As I said, if Bitcoin really does work the way you propose, then it should be easy to attack, especially after a decade of opportunity.

@chytrik I would not want to be your elementary school reading comprehension teacher.

The “honesty of the community” you mention is a indeed not trivial to overcome, that is exactly our point. You have to convince a vast majority of users to switch the rules of their node (to no longer follow the longest chain). This is not easy, clearly.

I’m not sure why you are being rude. You’ve been supplied with a wealth of information and explanations, and I’ve largely ignored

your more aggressive comments. Why be an ass? Nobody here is out to get you, there have been almost a half dozen different users that have attempted to answer your question